A. Defendant 2’s punishment (two years of suspended sentence in April) is too unreasonable.

B. The lower court’s sentence No. 1 (one million won in penalty) of the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The fact that the first instance court Defendant had already been punished as a crime of fraud several times is an unfavorable circumstance to the Defendant.

However, in light of the fact that the victim’s damage is not relatively large, and that the defendant agreed in full with the victim, that the defendant recognizes and reflects his fault, and that other circumstances shown in the argument of this case, such as the defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, etc., the prosecutor’s assertion is not acceptable, on the grounds that the first sentence of the court below is too uneasible and unfair.

B. The fact that the defendant in the second instance court recognized his mistake and reflected his mistake is favorable to the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the defendant has already been punished for several crimes related to violence (the victim is only one time), the injury suffered by the defendant is much more serious (the injury inflicted by the victim is minor), the defendant does not receive a letter from the damaged person (the victim received a letter from the defendant), and other various circumstances shown in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, it is not recognized that the second sentence of the court below is too unreasonable, and thus, the defendant's assertion is not acceptable.

3. The appeal filed by the Defendant and the prosecutor in conclusion is without merit, and all of them are dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.